City Council - Regular Meeting

Mhm.

All right, good evening. I will call this meeting to order at 5:00. Um Nicole, can we get a roll call, please? Yes, ma'am. Council Member Lara? Here. Council Member Finn? Here. Council Member Martinez?

Here. Mayor Pro Tem White? Here. Mayor Void? Here. All right, so we'll move on to public comment regarding closed session. Do we have any public comments? I have no written requests. Julie, do we have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, and can we please get a read out for the items for discussion in closed session? Thank you, Mayor. Uh the council will adjourn to closed session to consider items B1, conference with legal counsel, signific- significant exposure to litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9D2 and or 3, three potential cases. Uh B2, conference with legal counsel, initiation of litigation pursuant to government code section 54956.9, deciding whether to initiate litigation, one potential case. And finally, B3, conference with real property negotiators pursuant to government code section 54956.8, the vacant property located along Oak Valley Parkway. The APN numbers are set forth on the agenda itself. Agency negotiator or their designee, in this case, uh Carrie Mendoza will serve in that capacity. And the city of Beaumont and the Beaumont Unified School District under negotiation as price and terms of payment. That concludes my closed session report. All right, thank you, and we will adjourn to closed session at 5:02. I'm going to call.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

Mhm.

All right, I will call this regular session of the city council meeting to order at 6:18. And can I get a roll call, please? Councilmember Lara? Here. Councilmember Fenn? Here. Councilmember Martinez? Here. Mayor pro tem White? Here. Mayor Voyt? Here. And can we please get a report out from closed session? Thank you, Mayor. The There is no action to report for closed session items B1 through B3. That concludes the closed session report. All righty, excellent. And now, um if you would please join me in um bringing up Bishop Height Ritter for invocation. Followed by uh Councilmember Martinez for our Pledge of Allegiance. Sean, the mic I think it's on the base of the microphone. I think it's on. Okay, there we [clears throat] go. Our Father in heaven, we bow our heads at this time at the start of this city council meeting uh with thankful hearts. We're so grateful for this wonderful country that we live in. We're grateful for these leaders of our city here. We pray that um that would please provide them with guidance and direction that they can make uh good decisions for

[sighs and gasps] uh all of us that live here and we're grateful for this beautiful city and thankful for the opportunities and and blessings that we receive from living here and being part of this community. We pray for peace to prevail here that uh differences of political opinion can be uh handled peacefully and and respectfully that uh neighbors can um be kind to one another. We pray for uh [clears throat] these individuals that serve our community that they can too be blessed for their efforts and uh please bless their families also. And uh we ask these things, Father, in the name of thy beloved son, Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. Please join me in the pledge. [clears throat]

Ready? Begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat]

All right. Thank you. And do we have any adjustments to the agenda? Yes, Mayor. Please, I'd like to make two adjustments to the agenda this evening. I'd like to pull item J9 from discussion. You do have a handout though on the dais that was related to that, but feel free to keep that for future um discussion when we bring that back on June 2nd. And I'd also like to move item J10 to the beginning of action items. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. And we will start out um our announcements and recognitions um with the introduction [clears throat] and welcome to our fire chief, Fish, for Riverside County Cal Fire. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I appreciate you inviting me. I really wanted to come and introduce myself to the Council. Hopefully, I'm not an unfamiliar face to most of you as I was the operations chief here in the eastern area of the county for uh 5 6 years. It all adds up very quickly. Um I was appointed in December when Chief Weiser retired after 44 years. Um I was able to serve at his side for the last 5 years and now as County Fire Chief. Really wanted just come connect face to the name uh for those of you that may not know. You should know though. Um Having said that, um you know, one of the things I just want to reiterate is the the value of the relationship between the County Fire Department in Beaumont and how much we value you and what you bring to the table as a partner for us and part of the larger County Fire Department community. And um I know that you're going to be discussing with Chief Hopkins this evening on the renewal of the contract and we're really proud to have you as a member of our family and um if there's ever a time where there

are concerns or issues, please feel free to come forward and ask questions. We want to be here to help facilitate, answer, and meet the needs of your community where you're at. Thank you. [clears throat]

Great, thank you. We appreciate all the work by your staff daily for our community. So, thank you so much, Chief. Anybody have anything for him? No? Okay, very good. We will move on then to some of our proclamations. Hold tight with us. We have four tonight and I will start us off with Provider Appreciation Day for May 8th. So, coming up in just 3 days. Whereas Child Care Aware of America and organizations nationwide are recognizing child care providers on this day. And whereas the child care system supports children's growth, development, and educational advancements while creating positive economic impacts for families and communities. And whereas child care providers are essential to the health of our communities by fostering fostering safe and welcoming spaces, supporting working families, and creating enriching environments where children develop lifelong skills. And whereas the city of Beaumont, California recognizes that recognizes that child care has been and continues to be a lifeline for families, communities, and the economy. As such, it has and will continue to provide much-needed support to providers to help sustain the viability of child care. And whereas the city of Beaumont recognizes that our community benefits from comprehensive, well-resourced child care resource and referral organizations which build the supply and quality of child care and support child care providers through coaching, mentoring, and technical assistance. And whereas support for affordable, accessible, high-quality child care represents a worthy commitment to help families work, supporting children's healthy development and learning, and keeping our economy growing. Therefore, be it proclaimed that the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California hereby recognizes May 8th, 2026 as Provider Appreciation Day in Beaumont, California. And urge all citizens to

recognize child care providers for their important work and how valuable they are to our communities. So, thank you to our Child Care Aware of America organizations and for all of those child care representatives that we have in our community. You are helping to shape the future. Yay! [applause] All right, that will move us on to our building and safety month. Council member Lara?

Uh yes, building and safety month. Thank you, Mayor, for the allowing me to uh the honor of uh declaring Building Safety Month. So, whereas demographic trends show that Belmont will continue to experience significant population growth that drives changes to the local economy and market demand due to increase. And whereas Belmont has already experienced significant growth rate four times higher in recent years than in than in the year 2000 with approximately 75% of housing stock in the city built after 1979. And whereas Belmont is committed to ensuring that our continued growth and resilience are grounded in safety and reliability of our homes, buildings, and infrastructure, recognizing the essential the essential roles they play in daily life and in protecting the community when disaster occur. And whereas the city's confidence in the resilience of the buildings that make up our community is achieved through the devotion of Building Safety Officials who work year-round to ensure safe construction of buildings and enforce codes and standards to protect us in the buildings we live, learn, work, worship, and play. And whereas Building Safety Month is sponsored by the International Council by the International Code Council to remind the public about critic the critical role of our communities largely unknown unknown protectors of public safety, our code officials, who assure us safe, substantial, and affordable buildings that are essential to our prosperity. And whereas the Built to Last theme for Building Safety Month 2026 encourages us all to get involved and raise awareness about building and safety about building safety on personal, local, and global scales. And whereas each year in observance of Building Safety Month, people all over the world are asked to consider the commitment to improve building safety, resilience, and economic investment at home and in the community, and to

acknowledge the essential service provided to all of us by local, state, tribal, territorial, and federal building safety and fire prevention departments in protecting lives and property. Whereas the city of Beaumont is called upon to be conscious of the safety of buildings, to create awareness of the importance of construction and building codes and those who uphold those codes. Therefore, be it proclaimed that the city council of the city of Beaumont, California hereby recognizes May as Building Safety Month this this 5th day of May 2026. [applause]

Thanks so much. Thank you very much. Good job.

[laughter] [laughter] You're good. [clears throat] [laughter] [clears throat]

One of them Yeah, sorry.

Did you see it? Thank you. [clears throat] Congratulations. Thank you. Take care. Have a good evening. All right, we will continue on with small business week. Council member Finn. Thank you. Thank you and I get the privilege to do this one. So, a proclamation National uh Small Business Week, May 3rd uh through May 9th, 2026. Whereas small businesses are the backbone of the American economy, creating jobs and contributing to the unique character of communities, and whereas small businesses in the city of Beaumont play a vital role in shaping the community's strong identity, creating welcoming spaces, and providing the goods and services that residents rely on every day. And whereas Beaumont small businesses bring energy and activity to our commercial corridors and downtown, helping to transform everyday foot traffic into meaning- meaningful connections, local investment, and community pride. And whereas small business owners uh demonstrate resilience, creativity, and determination, continually adapting to the challenges while finding new ways to serve their customers and strengthen the local economy. And whereas these businesses are the gathering places, community partners, and champions of the local spirit that make Beaumont a vibrant place to live, work, and visit. And whereas for more than 60 years, National Small Business Week has been recognized by the US Small Business Administration to celebrate the contributions of small businesses and entrepreneurs across the nation. Now, therefore, let it be proclaimed that the

city of Beaumont here hereby recognizes May 3rd through May 9th of 2026 as National Small Business Week and encourages all residents to shop local, support show their support, and celebrate the small businesses that make Beaumont a strong, connected, and thriving community. Thank you. Yes, thank you. [applause] And thank you to our small businesses. And that'll lead us right into Economic Development Week and Mayor Pro Tem White.

Okay. Uh Economic Development Week is May 4th to the 8th. Uh whereas economic development professionals play a vital role in creating, retaining, and expanding opportunities that support long-term sustainable community growth. And whereas these efforts help cultivate thriving neighborhoods, strengthen economic prosperity, enhance quality of life, and build a robust tax base. And whereas in the city of Beaumont, economic development is advanced through collaboration among local government, regional partners, educational institutions, and initiatives such as the Pass Area Business Hub, which provides critical resources to entrepreneurs and businesses. And whereas Beaumont's economic development efforts are driven by a small but dedicated team working to support local businesses, attract new investment, recruit quality businesses, and position the community for continued success. And whereas economic development professionals professionals serve as connectors and problem solvers, bringing together residents, business leaders, and community partners to advance job creation, innovation, and long-term prosperity. And whereas Economic Development Week established by the International Economic Development Council recognizes the impacts of these efforts and celebrates 100 years of leadership in advancing economic opportunity in communities of all sizes. There now therefore be claimed that the city of Beaumont hereby recognizes May 4th to May 8th, 2026 Economic Development Week and celebrates the contributions of economic development professionals who work, strengthens our community today and helps build a prosperous future for generations to come. Thank you.

Yes, thank you. [applause] Small but mighty team. Come on up. Give them your proclamation. Oh, perfect. [laughter] Good job. Thank you. [applause]

All right, and one last thing, although we don't have a proclamation, but I would be remiss if I did not congratulate all the nurses out there on Nurses Week, which begins tomorrow, and concludes on May 12th, Florence Nightingale's birthday. So, yes. Thought I would add that in there. All right, so for public comment period, uh we will move on to the public comment period for items not on the agenda. Any one person may address the city council on any matter not on this agenda. If you wish to speak, please fill out a public comment form provided at the back table and give it to the city clerk. There is a 3-minute on public comments. There will be no sharing or passing of time to another person. State law prohibits the city council from discussing or taking actions brought up by these public comments. Nicole, do we have any public comments today? Yes, I do have an in-person. Douglas Emery. Good evening, Mayor, and city council members. Um Push the button right there. Oh, that would Technical.

[laughter]

I did not receive a training note. Um I So, I was at home writing a much late thank you card to the city of Beaumont Council. I said, "I got to get this in the mail tomorrow." I said, "Well, why don't I just drop it at the office on my way to our Rotary Club meeting?" I said, "Well, the first Tuesday of every month there's a chamber meeting, so I save myself a stamp." So, this is a much late thank you card to you, Mayor, and a city council members. So, dear Mayor Jessica Void, on behalf of the Beaumont Cherry Valley Rotary Club, we want to thank you and the city council for the sponsorship and council support of our recent scholarship fundraising casino evening event held in early March. We had over 100 community members, mostly from the city of Beaumont, who helped raise close to $10,000 for a Beaumont Unified School District and other local seniors in our community, as well as other service programs. So, again, thank you very much for your contributions and your support. So, I'll do the Emery mail over to [laughter] here. Um So, thank you very much for the support. And then on that next note, as you know, we love to raise funds for our community. Uh we have our either 29th or 30th We're not We're not sure. We got to track this out. Uh Cherries Jubilee and Gift Basket Extravaganza up at the Cherry Festival Friday, May 15th. Um and it's a new fundraiser for scholarships. And uh we get a great turnout. And not only are we getting baskets from local vendors and businesses and community members, uh we also have the Beaumont High School culinary um students coming in and doing all the desserts and food preparation, as well as a baked potato theme. So, if you love baked potatoes with all the fixings, we'll be doing that as well with our Interact youth. So, it's a great program. Uh Uh you buy tickets

online or through here. So, I got five copies here. We can pass this on to the city council members. Hopefully, we'll see you Friday, May 15th. And you don't have to serve food. We got that covered. Just bring your wallet or purse and help give back to the Beaumont community. So, thank you for the opportunity. And what time does it start? I'm sorry. It's Friday, May 15th. Doors open at 5:00 p.m. at the Chatigny Center. Thank you. And all copies of these for each one of you. So. Great. Thank you guys always so much for all that you do for the community. We appreciate you, Mr. Emery. Thank you.

Zuly, do we have any callers on the line? No callers. Okay. All right. And do we have anybody else who wanted to do public comment today? All right. Then seeing none, we will move on to the consent calendar. Um are there any items to be pulled for discussion off of the consent calendar? Mayor Pro Tem, did you want to pull any? Okay. All right. Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. Oh, let me uh first for public comment. Do we have any public comment for consent? I have no written requests. Zuly, do you have any callers on the line? No callers. Okay. So, I will entertain a motion. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve items G1 through G16 on the consent calendar. I'll second. And can I get a roll call, please? Council Member Lara? Yes. Council Member Fenn? Yes. Council Member Martinez?

Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White? Yes.

Mayor Boyd? Yes. That will take us to our youth council report. Do we have one today? No, none today, Mayor. Okay, very good. And moving right along to public hearings. Um item I1, tax equity and fiscal responsibility TEFRA hearing for Aurora Recovery Center located at 210 West 6th Street. And can we get a report by Ms. Nicole Wheelwright? Excuse me. Good evening, Council. Um a TEFRA hearing is a public hearing required under the Federal Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which stands for TEFRA, for certain types of tax-exempt bond financing. When a project is within city limits, um it and is proposed to be funded with tax-exempt private activity bonds, federal law requires an opportunity for public input before the financing can be approved. From the city's perspective, the purpose of a TEFRA hearing is not to approve or deny the project itself, but to provide transparency and allow members of the public to comment on the proposed issuance of tax-exempt bonds. After the hearing, City Council considers whether to adopt a resolution approving the financing solely for the purpose of meeting IRS requirements. The city does not assume financial responsibility for the bonds, and the city um and no city funds, credit, or obligations are pledged. Um and I do have on Zoom. Um I'd like to introduce Elizabeth Forsley representing Chapman and Cutler LLP. Um and she is participating via via Zoom to go into detail of the project and the hearing. Elizabeth, are you there? Yes, I am. Thank you, Nicole. Can everyone hear me okay? Yes. Wonderful. And thank you, Council, for your time and assistance in pursuing our approval. Um I'm as Nicole mentioned from Chapman and Cutler, and we are

serving as bond counsel for this bond financing transaction. And the bonds are being issued through the Public Finance Authority, which has authority to issue bonds to assist nonprofit organizations located throughout the United States. But in order for the PFA to issue the bonds, as Nicole mentioned, for the bonds to be tax-exempt, the bonds have to be approved by the jurisdictions where there are facilities being financed with the bonds. The proceeds of the bonds will be loaned to Fly Land Recovery Network to assist in acquiring membership interests in a network of currently for-profit companies that operate inpatient and outpatient substance abuse disorder and behavioral health treatment facilities throughout the United States. And one of these facilities is Aurora Recovery Center, which is located in Beaumont. It is an inpatient treatment center that opened in 2023 and consists of 31 beds and 55 employees. The borrower does not expect any changes in the licensing, employment, or services of Aurora Recovery Center as a result of the acquisition or of the bond financing. So, really other than holding the public hearing and adopting the resolution approving the issuance of the bonds, the city will not need to take any other actions or be involved in the bond issuance in any way. The city will not be liable in any way for the bonds, and the resolution that we're asking for you to adopt has that clear within the resolution's text. But, of course, I'm happy to answer any questions on the matter. All right, thank you for that. Um Nicole, did you have anything further to add? Nothing further. Okay. Then I will open the public hearing at 6:42. And do we have any public comments on this matter? I have no written requests. Susie, do we have any callers on the line?

No callers. All right, seeing none, then I will close the public hearing at 6:42 and open it up to council discussion. Do we have any further council discussion? Uh Council Member Lara? Yes, thank you, Mayor. just wanted to confirm that I heard correctly that the city is not liable for any of the funds or lack of payment of funds. Yes, that is correct. And this is for 750 million dollars. That's what this uh, agency or this company within the city of Beaumont is going to be receiving in bonds? Um, the 750 million, let me uh, confirm that. I believe that amount is actually throughout the entire United States. Um, whereas, yes, so the 750 million will be um, throughout the entire United States, not necessarily just to Beaumont. The the resolution identifies 67 million for the Beaumont facility. Right. Thank you. That's all the questions I have. Thank you. And I just wanted to confirm Legal has reviewed this as well. That's correct. Okay. And no concerns from Legal's perspective for the city. That's correct. Not from your General Counsel or Special Counsel, Bond Counsel. Special Bond Counsel as well. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem Way? Uh, what is the money going to be used for? The money will be used to acquire membership interest in um, the currently for-profit entity, um, but to become a non-profit entity for all those facilities. Okay. Thank you. All right. Do we have any further discussion? Otherwise, I will entertain a motion. Mayor, I'll move that we waive the full reading and adopt by title only a

resolution of the Council of the City of Beaumont California approving the issuance of the Public Finance Authority Revenue Bonds Finland Flyland Holdings LLC Obligated Group Series 2026 in an aggregate principal not to exceed $750 million and certain other matters relating there to. I'll second. I get a roll call? Sorry for my coughing [clears throat] fit. Yeah.

Um Councilmember Lara? Yes. Councilmember Finn? Yes. Councilmember Martinez? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Yes. All right. While Nicole gets some water, we will address item J10. I will be recusing myself from this item as my spouse is employed by some of the entities involved in this. And I will hand that over to Mayor Pro Tem White. You're up.

[laughter]

Thank you, Sarah. Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem and Council. Tonight's item is in regards to the fire protection agreement for the County of Riverside Fire Department. This item provides an overview for the proposed fiscal year 2026-2027 fire protection agreement with the County of Riverside Fire Department along with the associated cost estimates for fire protection and emergency response services. As a reminder, the city contracts with the county to provide comprehensive fire services including fire suppression, paramedic response, fire prevention, hazardous material responses, and overall operational support across multiple stations. The agreement also includes fire inspection services provided by our supervising fire marshal and fire safety specialist to ensure compliance with fire code regulations along with components related to the fire engine use agreement and cooperative staffing share agreement which support shared resources and regional coordination. The draft cost estimate for fiscal year 26-27 is approximately $10.05 million. This reflects personnel, operations, and support services based on current salary schedules, benefit rates, and the fire cost allocation plan. While the estimate is just over 10 million, staff is recommending a conservative budget allotment of 10 million in the proposed budget. Historically, the city has realized a year-end surpluses in this contract due to staffing vacancies, low overtime, and fluctuations in service demand, including approximately 1.6 million in fiscal year 23-24, $312,000 in fiscal year 24-25, and about 230,000 in the current fiscal year. This trend supports budgeting slightly below the estimate while still maintaining service levels. The increased projected cost this year is primarily tied to a change in the staffing model for the fire apparatus.

Previously, some units were staffed without dedicated paramedics. Beginning July 1st of this year, paramedics will be assigned to those units to enhance emergency medical response and overall service delivery. The county staffing model has been provided to each of you on the dais. That said, these positions are not expected to be fully staffed until mid-year, which means the city will likely realize about 6 months of salary savings that will help offset the initial cost increase. As part of implementing this updated staffing model, the county requires a formal letter from the city acknowledging and approving these revised staffing models. This letter, to be executed by the city manager, confirms the city concurrence with the updated service model and it's necessary step to move the county moving forward with these staffing adjustments under the new agreement. Looking ahead, multi-year projections show continued cost increases with estimates of approximately 10.5 million for fiscal year 27-28 and 10.9 million for fiscal year 28-29, primarily driven by standard salary increases, benefits, and support services. Staff will continue to monitor expenditures closely and will return to council with any necessary adjustments through the mid-year or year-end budget process. Once the staffing approval letter is executed by the city manager, the county will provide the final fiscal year 26-27 agreement along with a multi-year proposal for council consideration. That concludes my presentation. I also have Chief Hopkins online via Zoom for any available questions. Okay, thank you, Mr. Usher. Um, Nicole, we always take comments from council. Can you get me back online? Thanks. All right, any comments?

still in the audience if you have any additional questions. Council member Finn? Oh, no, my lights not Okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Public comments. Do we have any public comments? I have no written requests. Julie, do you have any callers on the line? No callers on the line. Okay. Any other no comments, no questions? I can't see your light there. No, but I'll make a motion.

Okay. Yeah. Um, I have a couple questions. Um, Chief, do you have a Can I ask you a couple questions? Yes, sir, but I might have to defer you specifically to Chief Hopkins on the specifics of the staffing plan that's been proposed. Understood. And and I'm not really looking at the specifics of that. Um, so we were supplied provided with this documentation here that about the three fire captain, fire apparatus engineer, and firefighter uh, three-person team that we Are we Have we not been doing this

No, you have not been. You were grandfathered into a legacy. Uh, this this was actually established obviously in 2012 as a county standard and uh, at the time uh, the county chose to allow the legacy programs or legacy cities that had different staffing models to adapt over a period of time. Uh, Beaumont was one of those that had a predated old uh, staffing model. Uh, when we had the staffing conversion correction, not a staffing conversion. When we had a change in our staffing hours, when we went from the 72-hour Cal Fire work week and they negotiated through uh, bargaining to go to a 66-hour, it created changes that we then had to mandate all of the uh, cities to start the conversion process towards uh, this standard. And so we're trying to get everybody into uniformity uh, because you all share resources and uh, we're trying to make like for like. We're trying to make uh, the uh, playing levels as level as possible and ensure everybody has a consistent model that is fair and equitable to everybody. The catalyst for it though was the change in the MOU and we have been working individually with cities um, for I want to say the past four years. That might be three years in order to create a pathway towards that and I believe what uh, Chief Hopkins has proposed the city is a pathway towards that compliance. And how is this different from where Cal Mesa was when they decided to go out and form their own fire department? Cuz I thought it was a very similar issue at that point. It it was and and I would defer to Chief Hopkins who may have been more directly I was not directly involved in those negotiations or that at that point in time. What I do know is that there was a dispute I believe under paramedic staffing versus non-paramedic staffing.

ALS versus BLS.

Yes, sir. And I I though speaking off the cuff, I can't speak to it in great detail without some research cuz I simply wasn't involved and I don't want to misspeak or mischaracterize the position that the department or the city of Calimesa had at that time. I think that would be unfair. Okay. Uh Chief Hopkins, can you respond to that question? Uh yes, sir. Good evening, council mayor. Turn not very good with the video. So yeah, so Let me back up. Currently, you are at a three-person staffing level right now. What this this new level does is it provides a captain and engineer, which is the driver, and a firefighter, one of them being a paramedic, each day versus and that's what we call our municipal staffing levels versus the traditional staffing level was a company officer. It could be either a captain or an engineer that's on duty plus a firefighter and a firefighter paramedic. So that's what the staffing model change is. What Calimesa had was Calimesa was at two-person staffing. And Calimesa um during that conversion uh they were two-person staffing BLS and then um they were told by the county that they needed to go to an ALS engine. Um they went to a two-person ALS engine and then when they were told that they they going to have to go to the three-person staffing level. Um that's where uh the contract uh uh was separated. Um you currently are doing um at Station 106, when it was brought online and any new stations that are brought online uh as a as a new station, um they

they go to this level right away. So, that's why when 106 opened, it opened as an engine. It originally opened with a a captain and engineer and a and a paramedic firefighter. Um and that's where also the the nine-person uh engine company was. So, you had the uh the three persons on per day uh with plans for the 66-hour uh work uh work shift. Okay, and um so, we are we do provide ALS service, correct? Uh yes and no. So, if you recall, um it was about a year and a half 2 years ago, Chief Fish probably has the better on the date. Um we had a paramedic shortage uh throughout the county, um mainly with uh COVID. When it happened, it shut down a lot of the paramedic schools. Uh so, many of the different fire departments throughout the state were struggling with uh paramedics. And what we were to having to do is is force on on duty our paramedics pretty much every day um out of the week. So, uh Chief Weiser made a tough decision to where uh stations that had multiple pieces of equipment, um they looked at uh the call volumes, and we had to redistribute the paramedics so that everybody had proper paramedic coverage throughout the county. And now, um thanks to uh Chief Weiser and the work that he did with uh CalHR and getting our um getting what's required in order to apply and and get into Cal Fire. Um we we were able to uh get some of the restrictions done to where now um we've been hiring steadily paramedics and it's anticipated that hopefully uh by mid-year of the next fiscal year that we're going to be able to start

re-establishing the paramedics on the equipment that the paramedics so Engine 66 was one of the engines that went to a BLS fire engine. Uh the squad stayed ALS with the paramedic. Engine 106 is paramedic and then Engine 20 is also still paramedic. Um and they did that based on data and now they're going to look at the data and then they're going to restart establishing which engine's going to go back first to paramedic, but um we've I think Chief Fish might have the numbers, but I want to say it's been somewhere between 25 and 50 paramedics that we've been able to hire. Um and and it's the future's looking good now that we have a a new process of hiring the paramedics uh through Cal HR. And how much is this change that we're being asked to approve uh how much additional cost is that? And I guess let me ask you it this way. What's the difference in our contract this year versus last year? Um I would have to pull that up and I'm sorry I don't have that with me. Um I'm not Let me see if I have the Exhibit A on my my tablet. I don't know if I'll disconnect myself or not. Um I have those numbers.

Okay. Do you have that, Darren? Yeah. I got one of those. Thanks. And and part of this um there's also the the the 5% escalator that's in there um that's It's calculated and um Darren, you have the numbers for the the BLS engine right now, cost? Well, the total cost of the agreement for the current fiscal year, Ren, was about 9.2, just slightly over. And then the estimated cost for fiscal year 2026-27 is 10.05. So, it's about a difference of about

10%, 8-9%? Yep. And is that similar in previous years? Is it Is this a significant jump over previous years? It is a jump. I mean, that's like due to the staffing model as well as the cost of the upgraded equipment. So, the engine we did per council's discussion, we put put the engine in the engine use agreement this past fiscal year, as well as like he said the 5% the 5% escalator that is included in the agreement. But the change in the staffing model is what made it be such a large jump from the previous fiscal year. Okay. As far as either of the chiefs know, um does Cal Mesa have ALS BLS now? Do you know? I know that they have a approved ALS program, but I believe that uh they have periods of time where they have difficulty staffing because of staffing turnover. Right. I understand that they have a mutual aid agreement with Yucaipa because they did qualify as far as Yucaipa was concerned.

They have an automatic aid agreement with the city of Yucaipa that uh is uh facilitated through the San Bernardino Cal Fire unit. And do we have an automated agreement with Cal Mesa? We do have an auto auto aid agreement uh with uh the city of Cal Mesa. Um Okay. Um We had a two-by-two meeting. So, I'm going to bring this up with Cal Mesa. Sure. And their request was for the city of Beaumont to begin to uh provide auto mutual aid agreement with them. So, there's Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cut you

it. I'm just wondering what what are they telling me if if we already have a mutual aid So I think the difference is understanding the difference between automatic aid and mutual aid. So automatic aid is a pre-established contractual agreement that says we will automatically send this equipment or this amount of equipment under these circumstances automatically, no questions asked. Mutual aid is different. In mutual aid, there's a even statewide, every fire department by default has a master mutual aid agreement through Cal OES that basically says that any fire department can reach out to another fire department and request additional resources that aren't automatic. They have to be on scene, evaluate the need, and then make the request for those resources, and then the requested agency, so if Cal Mesa came to us and said, "Hey, we need your help." we can choose to send resources or choose not to send resources based upon our own operational impacts. So and

And do you keep track records of when that We keep records of is turned down and when it's approved? Yeah, I would say in general terms, we don't typically turn down mutual aid requests. You know, our goal as the county fire department is when our allied agencies call for help that we will answer the call to the extent possible. What we're not inclined to do is provide the benefits of cooperative fire protection without being a member of cooperative fire protection. Okay. Um okay, sorry to hog all the questions. Anyone else have comments, questions? And if I may, sir, just on the paramedic piece, because I think this is a big success story of Chief Weiser that needs to be told because we're benefiting from it now. November is when those changes with the paramedic qualifications were hiring requirements changed. Since then, I've hired 79 paramedics since November. So, to Chief Hopkins' point, we are on a trajectory of recovery and growth. Uh it's been twofold. One, the change in the the minimum qualifications, but number two, the investment that the County Fire Department as a partner with College of the Desert and Moreno Valley College has put into investing in paramedic uh education and development here in the county. We're actively participating, recruiting, trying to get uh paramedic students from our community into our fire stations to train them, to encourage them to apply, and we're having a lot of success in that. And so, to Chief uh Chief Hopkins' point, we are on the road to recovery, and we hope by late summer to early winter to be in an active position to actually start saying that we can uh return paramedics to places where we had to take them away for the purposes of of uh sustaining our our staff. Okay. Thank you, Chief.

Yeah. Thank you. Um You have a question? Sure. Council Member Martinez. So, are there any other um agreements that are grandfathered that we might look in the future coming forward to update? Or we can

Yes, actually we're in the process of updating multiple cities. Uh the City of Palm Desert, City of La Quinta, City of Banning, uh all of them are actively in a process to do the same thing that um you have before you tonight, which is to move from the legacy model to the current model that is the standard. Okay. And this is um what the original question I was looking for is, do we have anything between Beaumont that is grandfathered that needs to be updated as well that might be coming before us in the future? Yes.

I'd have to defer to Chief Hopkins. I believe this is uh Todd Chief, is this the only one there? Yeah, this is this is the only thing. Um uh eventually um the the labor is going to try to go towards the 56-hour work week from the 66. That's always been Right.

uh part of the goal. Um what happened when we went to the 66-hour though, it's not going to there's not going to be another upcharge of having to add more positions because the way the way we did it it's it's basically already done. Um so when we start uh taking off the relief shifts and everything, there's not going to be that cost increase where some other cities might have a cost increase because um they have many more stations and they'll have to add for that that 56-hour work schedule, but there shouldn't be another cost increase for the squad or for engine 66. And um when the the county also has already started paying for that fourth body. Um that's going to be for the truck staffing that that we've had a a fourth person on on the engine um at 106 since January. And um hopefully within the next uh you know, few weeks that the truck will be in service and then that four-person staffing from the engine will switch to the uh to the truck company and there'll be no cost increase on there. Right, and that was going to be my question is is there a way to step in, but it sounds like we've already kind of set up that stepping process. I I set that up when we were doing the 66-hour so we went in every year becoming to ask for additional additional additional and there wasn't really a good way to do it because pretty much we had to add one body to make um to make that 66-hour work week work. We did that with uh Beaumont. We also did it with Manning, and then that was also with the engine 20 agreement. So, with those agreements, when we cuz right now on the 7th day, we have an engine crew that goes from 66 to 20, then to 89 for the 7th day coverage of each one of those stations. Um when we go to the 56-hour work week, um those

will be pulled apart, that relief shift, and then those bodies will go into um the actual stations, and you'll have a three-platoon shift, which is what the like what the truck company is um on a basically for a 56-hour work week. Okay. All right, I appreciate that. Thank you. Uh seeing no other requests to speak, I'll entertain a motion. So, moved, I'll second. Go ahead. Go ahead. Um all right, so I'll make a motion uh to authorize the city manager to execute a letter approving the updating updated staffing model including the addition of paramedic positions to the fire apparatus as required by the county to implement the new service delivery structure. I'll second. Uh roll call, please. I'll take this for Nicole so she doesn't lose her voice. Council Member Lara. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White. Yes. Council Member Martinez. Yes. Council Member Finn. Yes. Probably not the right order, I apologize. It was easy. Thank you, Council. We we value you and we appreciate you uh having faith in us. Thank you. Appreciate it.

[snorts]

Thank you, Council. Sorry I couldn't be there tonight. Thank you. All right, we will head back to item J1, uh Albert A. Webb Associates Professional Service Agreement Capital Improvement Project R26-08 Brookside Avenue street improvements and we'll get a report by Mr. Vestal. All right, thank you, Mayor. Can I have IT show my screen, please? I'll walk through this graphic in a moment. So, Brookside Avenue street project will reconstruct Brookside Avenue from Cherry Avenue to Orchard Heights. Converting the existing inverted crown roadway to a tilt section. The project also includes construction of a flood control master drainage facility along the corridor. The proposed tilted section will allow storm water to flow directly into the new channel helping to mitigate the flooding uh issues prevalent in this area. The design scope also includes a left-handed Excuse me, a left-hand turn pocket on the eastbound lane turning onto Orchard Heights from Brookside Avenue. And the addition of a new right-turn pocket from northbound Cherry Avenue to eastbound Brookside Avenue. Staff has reached out to the county to potentially partner with the county to re-rehabilitate the remaining portion of Brookside Avenue from Cherry Avenue to Highland Springs Avenue. The project was advertised on January 27th, 2026 for design and the city received 10 proposals on February 26th,

2026. Staff reviewed and ranked the proposals based on ad- advertised criteria. The review panel consisted of CIP, land development, and planning departments. Web ranked the highest with an average score of 92 followed by M&S Engineering with at 87 and Rick Engineering at 83. Therefore, staff is recommending council award a professional service agreements to Webb for the design. Uh please note that a former staff member is on the design team for Webb. No consideration was provided during the review or ranking um for that staff member. On your screen, you'll see the conceptual plan uh provided by Tri Pointe Homes. Uh just of note is the cross sections on the very bottom. The street is currently an inverted crown, meaning that it acts like a channel. All streets act like a channel, but this has the flow line in the center, which does cause quite a bit of um frustration for vehicles traveling down there. Uh the proposed condition would be a tilt section. Eventually on the county side, they can reverse that and make a traditional street having a crown in the center, but as it is right now, it'll be a tilt, which will allow all water to flow to the south side and be intercepted by the proposed channel. This concludes my presentation, and I'm I'm happy to answer any questions. All right. Um could uh well, see if there's any public comment first. Do we have any public comment? I have no written requests. Zuley, do we have any callers on the line? No callers. Okay, and I will uh start off council discussion. Could you just verify where the turn pockets were going to be again? I think you said a

I'm assuming it's a right-hand turn going south, and then uh a left-hand turn also going south on Cherry. So, one going on Orchard Heights south onto Orchard Heights, and one going south onto Cherry. Uh northbound on Cherry to turn onto Brookside will be a right-hand turn lane. And then uh eastbound on Brookside Avenue turning into what's now Curry Chapel Beaumont will be a left left right right turn pocket I believe. I think I I said left turn. I I apologize. Very good. Thank you. A21 just to make sure I clarify this is if I Yeah. This is for the street construction and the channel. That is correct. Both. With with a slope coming from the county side so the water can drain onto the Brookside channel. And then the part where you said in the future if it decides to go back to level then that's another that's not a part of our original Cuz remember we had talked about this a while back on what we were going to do to that. I don't remember talking about a slope at that point. So I guess my question is it'll stay that way until it's improved otherwise. That is correct. There there the city staff at least has no additional plans to um construct the north side which is on the county. Okay. And this will solve the water in the middle going off to the channel so there shouldn't be a big flood going down there. I just want

Well, there'll be a little bit with the word solve. [laughter] So it'll improve the flow of the water. Absolutely. Okay. And therefore we should see reduction of the water gathering Yeah. that we see now. A drastic reduction. Drastic is even better. Okay. And in the future since the school district's looking at that corner lot for possible elementary school um in the future if they're doing any improvements to that, we're not going Are we going all the way up to Highland Springs? We are not. That that all occurs in within the county. So the city's boundary ends at the end of the the easterly end of um Curry Chapel.

Okay, that's right. Okay. That answers. Thank you. We did reach out to the county and I'm I'm waiting for a response that they would participate in the construction when we when the city arrives at the construction phase and maybe do a slurry like I believe that was a prior conversation about maybe slurring the entire road. Okay. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem White? Um so your project budget summary here showing 5 million and that's the 5 million from the developer agreement with the developer, right? That is correct. So as far as we know at this point, the 5 million's going to cover design, permits, and construction. Yes, the design cost was um more than we anticipated. Generally, it's about 5% of the construction cost. Um this is falling in just slightly above 10%. Okay, and you mentioned that there was a a I forget how you put it, former employee employee. Who's that? Uh Jeff Hart. And will he be working on this project? Uh he is listed as a uh oversight and quality assurance quality control um staff. Okay. Thank you. Hearing no other comments, I will entertain a motion. May I make a motion to approve the agreement with Albert A. Webb Associates for professional design services for the period of May 5th, 2026 through May 5th, 2031 in amount not to exceed $596,400

and approve the contingency of $59,640 for a total not to exceed of $656,040 and authorize the city manager to sign any any sign off on any proceeding amendments or purchase or purchase purchase change orders within the authorized contingency amount. Authorize the issuance of a purchase order to Albert A. Webb and Associates in the amount of $596,400 for professional design services. I'll second. Can I get a roll call, please? Council Member Lara? Yes. Council Member Finn? Yes. Council Member Martinez? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White? Yes. Mayor Voyd?

Yes. All right, that moves us to item J2, Fair and Peers Professional Services Agreement Capital Improvement Project R26-13, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Also, a report by Mr. Bustle. Um Mayor, if um there are no public comments and council is comfortable, I would like to make a motion to approve J2 and J3. Okay. Um any any objections from council up here? Okay, can we see if there's any uh public comment on item J2 and J3? I have no written requests. Julie, do you have any callers on the line? No callers. Okay. Would you like to make a motion?

I I made my made your motion. Do we have a I'll second.

Second. Okay. Can I get a roll call, please? Council Member Lara? Yes. Council Member Finn? Yes. Council Member Martinez? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White? Uh was it a PowerPoint or PDF? Okay. Yes. Mayor Voyd? Yes. All right, that will take us to item J4. Uh award of professional service agreement to Global Talent Entertainment for entertainment booking and talent management services for the 2026-27 special events and concert series. Uh, staff report by Mr. Story. Yes, thank you Mayor and Council. Um, this first item is a professional services agreement with Global Talent Entertainment. Uh, the city released an RFP back in February asking for uh, bidders to uh, submit for services that would be used for the fiscal year, uh, the remaining fiscal fiscal year from July until next summer as well for uh, Beaumont Nights and booking talent as well as some of the other events that we hold throughout the year where we have concerts or different bands. That includes our 4th of July, uh, Day of the Dead celebration, Blizzard Bash, and different seasonal events that we have. So, uh, this contract is for their professional services to help us in in booking these bands. Um, we went through the process. We received a couple of individuals and companies that would um, uh, bid for the the opportunity. Uh, they're listed in the staff report. The biggest um, advantage to us in doing it this way is it allows us to do the contract with a single entity. Uh, in previous years, uh, we have tried to do the uh, contracting for each individual

night, each individual band. Uh, and now that we're doing so many um, Beaumont Nights and so many different things, it became very taxing on staff and we ended up spending way more staff time um, than having a a firm do it for us. And so, uh, this is uh, to help remedy that and to uh, have us one consistent uh, agency that's going to be um, providing these bands and different help different performers for us. Uh, so [snorts] the information is is in there. Uh, there's the two items that were basically paying for the fiscal impact for the not to exceed 300,000 is in regards to service fees, which is what we are paying the actual company. And then a basically a pass-through cost, but that's the the performance fees are also paid through that entity as well. And so this is to pay for the actual artists and then a company to get us those artists. So if there's any questions, I can help answer questions. Okay, thank you. Do we have any public comment on this item? I have no written requests. Do we do have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, then I will open it up for council discussion. Mayor Pro Tem White? Um

[clears throat] So you went out to RFP on this, correct? Yes, sir. And um what why did you go with this um it looks like you had two two offers or proposals?

Yeah, the biggest um challenge that we had with the with one of the bidders, the bidders that the bidder that we did not choose, uh was the way that they packaged their pricing was it made it look a lot more expensive than it was. Um so we had to kind of dwindle it down to see what are we actually getting to get like an apples-to-apples comparison for the two. And once we did that, um this company was a better deal for us. And I felt we staff felt that um just their connections, the um the bands [clears throat] that they offered uh were more in line with the type of individuals that we wanted to bring into the city. Are they uh is are the bands that they represent or book um all cover bands or

Both national acts and uh tribute bands. So um For example, let me pull up my So some of the national acts that they have access to um that we're looking into for say the 4th of July, which was going to be some of our national acts Uh like Chase Matthews and Corey Kent um uh Thompson Square, Jameson Revial, Colt Ford. Uh so some of these are country artists and then some of the rock bands that they gave us were the Cold War Kids and OK Go and uh people that are on national tours. Uh so they have access to the national bands and then there's also um tribute bands as well. And they will um will they be providing the entertainment for this year's 4th of July? That is the hope. Yes, with um an approval of this contract today then um tomorrow we can move forward with some of the uh bands that they're hoping can perform for 4th of July. So we're looking for a national act a country national act for the 4th of July. Um and then uh we will have some funds available to do a couple of the national acts throughout the year. And this is a contract for um 1 year? Correct. This one is, yes.

And no automatic extensions or things like that or Um I think there was a Hold on, let me make sure. [snorts]

And do you know if there takes us through June So this takes us through the performers of next year's Okay. the June the June performers for uh Market Night. Okay. And um you know, one of the issues that that was embarrassing to us years ago was that the entertainment company provided us with a band an act that our neighbors got at a different price.

weeks later for a much [clears throat] much lower price. So um I hope that um we don't run into that, but okay. Thank you. Welcome. All right. Any other questions? Okay, then I will uh make a motion to uh approve and authorize the city manager to execute a professional services agreement with Global Talent Entertainment to provide entertainment booking and talent management services for the city's community events for a one-year term from July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2027 in amount not to exceed 300,000. And authorize the city manager to approve minor non-substantive changes to the agreement subject to the city attorney approval. I'll second. Uh Mayor, before you do a roll call, one last question. Um this is 300,000, does that cover the fees for the entertainment acts? Yes, sir. Okay.

Yes. Thank you. And can I get a roll call, please? Council member Lara? Yes. Council member Finn? Yes. Council member Martinez? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White? Yes. Mayor Boyd? Yes. All right, that moves us to J5, award a professional services agreement to Audio Services Live for concert production, staging, audio visual, and event technical services also for the '26-'27 concert series. And Mr. Story again. Yes, thank you. So, in conjunction with the theme of the night is getting everything buttoned up for all the different concerts throughout the fiscal year for next year. This will allow us to do the staging and audio technical services for about 20 different events throughout the year ranging everything from our market nights to 4th of July to some of the other events in which we have stage set up or which require sound and lighting and different things. And so, this allows us to work with this company throughout throughout the year as a reference. So, you know, the there was a not to exceed amount of 220,000 for the term of the agreement. Roughly the the staging and the set up and then staffing and all the event technical for market nights is just north of $10,000 for for those nights. So, that'll kind of let you know, you know, we'll we'll be able to get 20 of those essentially, those setups throughout the year the fiscal year and anything that we need. Okay, great. Do we have any public comment for this item? I've no written requests. Julie, do we have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, then I will open it up for council discussion and council member Finn? Hi, yes, thanks Mayor. So Doug, is this just this enables it so when a band shows up it's just going to literally plug and play, is that correct? Yeah, yes and and this again puts professionals who do this every day in contact. So every band has a rider agreement and they want some specific things and some of those

specific things are sound and technical and then certain colored M&M's or whatever they want in their little snack shack or whatever it is. They put those things and we give that to this company and they take care of everything for us. And so then they have like a team captain on site to to handle any issues and stuff like that. That's one of my favorite things about this company. So they have a great team the musicians. I just get to clap for them and tell them good job and thank them for coming. All right, thanks Doug. Thanks Mayor. [clears throat]

And Mayor Pro Tem White? And also act as MC, right? Well, if any of you ever want to be MC, you're more than welcome to be MC instead of me. But yes, I do like to go up there and shout a little bit, so. Our Mayor might like to do that, but uh More than welcome. More than welcome. I just wanted to say that I went to the Beaumont Nights last week and we're making leaps and bounds moving forward. I like what you did with the the big shade structure. Yeah. And um there's I thought a pretty good turnout for the first night, so. Great turnout from the community, so we're excited to offer 11 more nights on Thursdays and we hope everyone comes out and has a great time with us. Okay, thank you, Mayor. Great, I will echo those sentiments. I also attended and I thought it was excellent. There was a great turnout on Thursday. All right then, I will entertain a motion. May I make a motion to approve and authorize the city manager to execute a professional service services agreement with audio services live to provide concert production staging and audio visual and event technical services for the city's community events for the term from June 10th, 2026 through June 30th, 2027 in a mountain out to exceed $220,000 and authorize the city manager to approve minor non-substantive changes to the agreement subject to city attorney approval. I'll second. Can I get a roll call, please? Councilmember Lara? Yes. Councilmember Finn? Yes. Councilmember Martinez? Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem White? Yes. Mayor Voyd? Yes. All right, and that brings us to our Stewart Park update and discussion. And it's the story show. Thank you. I wanted to provide an update from the last time that I was here with council to provide some of the updates of events that have happened since I was here in March. And so since then, as you know, we have been waiting to get the final sign-off from both National Parks and O Gals, who is our state the state administration who's administering that that grant in Sacramento. We've been working with them. We had previously submitted all of the NEPA and final environmental paperwork to them back in November. And the update to you in March was there was a lot of us requesting information and where are we at? Where are we at? Where are we at? We finally after that council meeting, we received an update from O gals on in on March 23rd advising that they wanted some additional information. That additional information was in regards to a shippo regulations. So the state has historic preservation office. They wanted some additional information. At the time we were um given some information and given a organization that could help us submit some specific forms and so they wanted some additional forms based on what was submitted in our NEPA. Basically to rule out are there or were there any historical structures on site that needed to be included in a state historical registry or anything along those lines. The initial NEPA report that we submitted said no, it doesn't need it and nothing really qualified for it because

they would need to be um from 2024 they needed to be 50 years old from that point in order to qualify. There was nothing on there that did but they wanted more substantive forms indicating that. Those forms had to be filled out by a specific historical architect and archaeologist and so we worked with Mr. Mr. Boatman our soon to be city manager actually was able to provide us some great contacts some individuals who have specialized in this. We reached out to them pretty quickly after we were given this information in March and we engaged them with a contract to help us fill out these forms. The forms like I said had to be submitted by someone who carries a special authorization special stamp special things to basically authorize those forms as they're submitted. So we engaged Statistical Research Institute or Incorporated their SRI out of Redlands. They're a cultural resource management firm and they were help us able to help us get those forms all submitted. Those forms were submitted on April 23rd back to OES. And the process after that submission is they need to now give those forms and they have done this that to give those forms to National Park Services. National Park Services provides us what's called a letter of concurrence basically saying everything in these forms paired with the NEPA and everything else in the environmental documents we agree with. And now once they have that they will submit it to SHPO. My last communication with them as of yesterday morning was that the documents have been received at National Park Services. They indicated that they plan on National Park Services sending it back to OES this week was the term in the email and once that's done SHPO is the final sign off on the

California state side uh who needs to sign off on the forms and then the the NEPA. Um one of the great benefits of having SRI with us is they have a great relationship with the SHPO and I am very [clears throat] confident in his ability to to be able to reach out and and make that a pretty expedited approval and and form. I did confirm with OES that the only thing that we're waiting on from that is an email from them releasing the project and authorizing us to begin again. There is no item that I would have to bring back to council to officially start things again. I was concerned about that especially with us not having a a meeting later this month. I didn't want there to be some type of council action that was required that would stall things if needed. So I I was encouraged to hear that. We have also reached out to literally every elected official that we have that has an office in Sacramento, Washington D.C. anywhere in between. And they have done their due diligence in making phone calls, making these offices, both sides, D.C. and Sacramento, make them know that Beaumont is waiting as patiently as we can right now, but there are the some urgency and some definite some need to be responded to quickly. I will say that the responses have increased. They are being a little bit more responsive than they were in December and January where I wasn't receiving anything. But so I do appreciate the help from our elected officials and I do want to give them credit for petitioning and and being on our side and really helping this process go through. So I do appreciate each of them. And so that's that's kind of where we are with with things. Obviously without saying that goes without saying that we're still in a

construction hold. And so the phase one construction is currently on hold because of NEPA and environmental things and all that stuff that from previous updates that goes with that. We are still on hold and we are looking at probably we're about halfway done. 6 months-ish is probably what the phase is left in phase one that we would need to once we give them the go that they would probably have about 5 to 6 months-ish of work to do. All right, great. Thank you for that update. Nicole, do we have any public comment on this item? I have no written requests. Do we do have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, thanks. Before we kind of step out to council discussion, I would like to make a couple comments as well with regards to this project. So thank you Doug and your team and Brittany as well for all that you guys have been doing to stay on top of this. Council Member, excuse me, Mayor Pro Tem White and myself did go to Washington, D.C. with staff the week of April 20th. And at which time we did discuss with both of our Senator representatives, Padilla's office, Schiff's office, as well as our Congressman, Congressman Ruiz. I also was encouraged to within that week be contacted by the Governor's office. And I actually did have a meeting with representation from the Governor's Governor's office yesterday, in which they have subsequently sent emails stating that the Governor's office is tracking this project to ensure that it kind of helps to get through. So, I was encouraged. She did in the meeting yesterday mention that our D.C. contacts had reached out to her, and also requested this kind of follow-up. So, I think that that was beneficial for us as a council to at least have that representation there.

And she also mentioned Ochoa Bog Wallace's office as well touching base with them. So, I do think that those are all positive things. It is nice to hear that hopefully we'll have a response by the end of this week. When I spoke, her name is Sky with the Governor's office, she said that she would give us an update by the end of this week as well. So, I know that I will continue to stay in contact also. But, I do want to recognize everyone who has been working to get this project pushed forward, especially as we see that cost climbing of the pause. So, I just kind of wanted to highlight what had been done from our side of things, and truly thank you to the staff who have been continually following up so that we can get this park back online for our community, which is really the important part in all of this. That we unfortunately don't have a park that we are able to utilize, and it is just absolutely terrible. So, um wanted to make sure that I kind of highlighted that um for us today. So, Mayor Pro Tem White? Um so, help me understand. It's been a while since we did this, but the contractor who's doing phase one was approved to do phase two as well? No, we still would have to go out to bid for phase two. And so, in those months while they finish phase one, um if we um get the grant money and everything's done and everything goes through and we get the green light to begin, uh that grant does require specific steps to be done in the bid process and all those things. And so, we couldn't bid that project out prior to this process officially starting or the green light being given by them. So, we will be doing that in that 6-month period um while they're finishing phase one. And phase two would start obviously after phase one is done. Are there cost savings that phase one's could be doing that that phase two could benefit from and we could benefit from? I I mean, I think Robert could not talk to

it, too. I think there's obviously if you're saying like if the same contractor got awarded phase two. No, I'm I'm just saying that um I feel like we're back to square one where we finished phase one and then we hope we can get the money and then you know, is it fully funded with that grant for phase two? We're once the bids come in, we'll have to see what comes in. I I do think costs have gone up a little bit probably since we've done the preliminary bids and and the engineer's estimate that came out for it. Um I would not be surprised if there's maybe a CIP amendment or something that would have to come to move money from an another project or a project that came under under budget or or whatever. Um there are some of those options. Um but I don't know those numbers yet cuz I don't we haven't received the final bids for what phase two is going to cost. Okay. Thank you. Council member Lara? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Um Council member White touched on something. Is it possible, or can we ask look into the maybe having the contractor that's currently doing phase one is there any way to have him do phase two without going out to bid? Um so that perhaps there could be some savings there without having to remobilize a different contractor on site. I Go ahead. I mean, yeah. I love it.

We No. He will have to competitively competitively bid for phase two. And unfortunately, it is construction, and it is the lowest responsive bidder that will win phase two. I think he has a maybe a competitive edge since he's been out there, but unfortunately, he'll have to determine what that is, not the city. Okay. Thank you very much. Mhm. [clears throat]

All right. So, um my suggestion to move forward is that you know, we're kind of in this wait-and-see period for a week or so. So, obviously, we don't have our next meeting. So, if we can bring back another update June 2nd, um just if you haven't moved forward with construction, um you know, that might be where we're kind of out at that point. Hopefully, we've been given the green light, and we can see dirt moving prior, um and we can just announce it at June 2nd. But, uh Council member Werfen? Yes, Mayor. So, we do not need to or do we or do we not need to give staff that authorization to start construction? We do not according to what Mr. Story stated earlier. We just need the them to say that we're allowed to start moving dirt, and we will get the contractor out there as soon as possible. So, we are hopeful by next Monday we have that answer. Does anybody have any other objections, or does that sound reasonable to the council? Lately reasonable. Nothing's reasonable with this project at this point. Just quick question, Mayor. So, you know, it's in a disarray out there with everything that's happened since the original time. Has the current uh contractor been looking and keeping updated how it looks? In other words, where some concern is they come out and they say, "Oh boy, we're going to have to do all of this just to even get started." Is that something that hopefully is not in the equation or The contractor has been out to the site and so we've been They've been there. They've done some fence repair. There's some some wind damage to things. They've handled a couple of things. Uh the state really hamstrung us on certain things that they can't do. We weren't even given permission to do weed abatement on our own properties because they said that that would disturb too much dirt. Uh and so there were a lot of difficult um decrees from Sacramento that were given to us. Um but they're aware of the condition of the site. I've met one of I've met the

contractor and the the superintendent out there to handle other issues. Um when it rained, you know, we had to get water out of the site on different occasions and different things. And so they they know what it looks like. Um there's definitely some cleanup and there's definitely some like a little bit of demobilization, I would call it. Um cuz there's about 15 storage containers out there on site that need to be emptied and all the product taken out of it and moved to different sites and different things. And so they're aware of it. I feel like they're eager to start. Um obviously they're eager to get their people back to work and working on things. And so um he he knows what challenge is ahead of him. So, anything that they see that may have to be done, they would do. I mean, is that a part of the original agreement? So, you know, you have to

of phase one. They're going to get phase one completed because that's what they're contracted to do for us is build us phase one. Okay. I appreciate it. That does bring one thing I I think we need a huge thank you to this contractor as well for their patience. I will, yes. Yeah, so please please make sure to relay that to them as well.

that. Okay. Very good. Thank you for that update. All right, that will move us along to item J7, a professional services agreement for design services for 105 6th Street, which is our cleaners building. And we have a staff report by Mr. Pelser. Yes, a brief one. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um this contract, if approved tonight, would engage the architect BFK out of Pasadena, California to do to bring the dry cleaner building up to California building code standards. Excuse [clears throat] me. Title 24 energy standards, CalGreen and ADA standards, and to generally put her into a leasable commercial state. The contract is for not to exceed 80,000. 77,000 is the lump estimate for the scope of work and 3,000 for minor expenses. Um reimbursables. Um BFK is a small practice, although the principal Brian Knight and the other principal architects on the team both have experience working for very large architectural firms, Johnson Fain and some others or throughout their career. They have a 30-year plus experience working with municipal clients as well. So, we feel very confident. Um as the report notes, we have engaged a construction manager to help us throughout this process. They put the bid together, the RFP together, and have been working with staff and our purchasing division to bring us to this point. So, I have a high degree of confidence in them, and I think we can finally get going on this. In terms of timing, I would expect this design process to end October, November. That's incumbent on us being very quick in our turnaround to them. Which would then put us in a place to bid out the work

by the end of the year and then would probably be about a 4-month construction period. So, I think you're looking at next spring, early summer, we can celebrate a grand opening of a tenant there most likely. Great. All right, do we have any public comment for this item? I have no written requests. Do we do we have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, I will open it up for council discussion. Mayor pro tem? Uh just uh what is your sense as far as um the future tenants um opinion of how long it's taking? I They've been very patient. Uh we stay in regular contact with them and um they certainly would have liked to have been further along than we are now. Um the exclusive negotiation arrangement we have with them has a base term which ends at the end of June and then a 90-day extension thereafter. So, we will probably come back in a couple of months and just extend that further. Um they've certainly have not expressed any significant concerns with me. I mean, they're a growing business, too, and they recently opened in Yucaipa. And so, um I think they they love the building. They love the the opportunity and they're hanging in there. So. Okay, and the the design it will be designing it specifically for their needs. Correct? There will be some evaluation of that. It's more Our scope of work is more about putting it into a doing the the sort of building code and energy and ADA requirements so that they could come in and do their minimal work. Now, if you've been to their existing location in Redlands, it's not There's not a lot of tenant improvements that they need to to do here. So, um as we get into the process, we will

engage with them, and if there's some If there's something easily that we could include in our scope of work that would otherwise work for them, we will certainly do that. But, they will likely have some minimal tenant improvements specific to their operation that they will have to do afterwards. I I just want to know that if um we we commit to that size of in of investment, and then they decide to go elsewhere, that we have done stuff that would make the business marketable to somebody else who may not be doing the same. It absolutely would. It would be in a leasable state at that point. Okay. All right, thank you. All right, seeing no other discussion, I'll entertain a motion. Mayor Voyles, a motion to approve a professional services agreement with BFK BFK Architecture and Planning in an amount not to exceed $80,000 for architectural and design services associated with the project F26-02. I'll second. Can I get a roll call, please? Councilmember Lara? Yes. Councilmember Fenn? Yes. Councilmember Martinez? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem White?

Yes. Mayor Voyles? Yes. All right, and that brings us to our last action item of the night with a follow-up discussion on short-term rental program management options, and Mr. Usher. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. The item brought forward is a follow-up to our prior direction regarding short-term rentals, and tonight staff will be presenting three program management options for your consideration, each with different levels of cost, staffing impact and operational involvement. As a quick reminder, when this item was previously discussed, staff identified approximately 52 short-term rental units operating in or near the city, generating estimated 1.09 million annually. The statistics were provided by Granicus, a software company that specializes in products to assist the local government with managing short-term rentals. That translates to roughly 75 to 109,000 dollars in potential transient occupancy tax or TOT tax revenue each year. Currently, the city does not regulate short-term rentals, is not collecting any TOT, which means we're not capturing that revenue. We are also not have the visibility into how these units are operating within the community. Since that time, recent state legislation SB 346 has also strengthened the city's ability to require data from those platforms, which improves our ability to implement and enforce a program if council chooses to move forward in that direction. Based on your previous direction, staff has evaluated three approaches with the main difference between them coming down to how much control the city wants, the level of effort required from staff, and how much of activity we're actually able to capture and enforce. The first option is a fully operated program operated by the city, where we would manage registration, compliance, enforcement, and tax collection

internally by staff. This option provides full control over the policy and operations, but comes with an estimated annual cost of about 31,000 dollars, and would require ongoing coordination across multiple departments, particularly impacting code enforcement and administrative staff workloads, along with the purchase of a short-term rental software. The second option is fully outsourced model using a consultant to manage the program. This option is estimated to be about 16,000 dollars in year one, and includes compliance monitoring across multiple platforms, a registration system, reporting tools, and supports for tax collection. This significantly reduces the burden on staff while still allowing the city to capture revenue more comprehensively and enforce compliance across different platforms. There would be some cost escalation over time, but it provides more complete and scalable solution. We of course could implement the TOT module at a later date if council chooses so, which would reduce the cost of year one to $11,000. Third and final option is a hybrid approach where the city would combine both staff and a consultant, as well as internal agreement with a platform such as Airbnb to collect and remit the TOT on our behalf. This option has no direct cost to the city and requires minimal staff effort, but it only captures revenue from a single platform depending on the carrier that we enter an agreement with, and does not include other rental sites, direct bookings, or provides limited data due to a privacy restrictions within the agreement. As a result, it's the easiest to implement, but it's also the most limited in terms of revenue capture and enforced visibility. The decision comes down to count council's comfort level on how comprehensive you want this program to be. If the goal is to establish a program that captures activity across the board and allows enforcement, the outsourced option, which is option two, provides the most complete approach with the least strain on staff.

If council provides to move forward with either option, any of the options, [clears throat] staff will return with a draft ordinance and proceed with the appropriate next steps based on the selected option, and then the development of a short-term rental program will require an ordinance and resolution. That concludes my presentation and staff's available for any questions. And thank you for that report. And do we have any public comment on this item? I have no written requests. Zully, do you have any callers on the line? No callers. All right, I'll open it up for council discussion. Council member Martinez. Thank you, Mayor. Um to the fact on option two about the collection and enforcement of violations. So, how does that work? So, we on option one have full control of policy and enforcement, but on two, it says here that allows for collections and enforcement. So, how does that work for an outside agency enforcing the violation? Sure. So, what the city would do is work with this company or this consultant, and we would draft an ordinance establishing a short-term rental program. In that ordinance, we would then establish the penalties and policies and registration of the program. So, the registration cost of a short-term rental to register within the city of Beaumont, and then any penalties associated with late fees, late penalties, the lack of registration, and then we would then give that to the consultant, and then they would enforce on our behalf. So, there is some enforcement, but if it's done in-house, the timeliness of it is a little bit more efficient in-house versus having a consultant do it.

So, are they sending out a letter like an like a tax bill or something that they have to pay? Okay, and then if they don't comply, then at some point, since they don't have the authority, the consult to to collect, would they come back to us and say, "Hey, we tried several times and it's not working." or does it automatically go somewhere on a tax bill? What I'm trying to get at is at some point, if we're going to have to take over enforcement, then it really isn't a low cost because we're going to have to get involved at some point anyway. That's what I'm trying to figure out. So, is it fully where they can handle it, or are we going to have to at some point step in if needed at that point? The meeting I had with the consultant, he said that their organization, cuz this is what they specialize in, has never had a problem where the community enhancement officers or code enforcement officers have to step in for enforcement. So, they said that they've had no problem, they're able to handle that. So, that's why it would reduce the burden on staff based on the cities that he's worked with. And then based on our prior discussions, um we talked about what we think we have because we don't know exactly how many of these we have and we estimated that um a break-even cost of about how much would we have to Well, obviously we'd have to collect this, but you had mentioned at one point how much you think we'd be bringing in. And was it under the 31 or was it at the 16? Cuz I can't remember what we discussed. So, based on the figures, and this is from like I had mentioned previously, it's a company called Granicus, which they have a bunch of local government software and one of them is for the regulation of short-term rentals. They were able to provide me that we have roughly about 52 short-term rentals within the city of Beaumont and they generate based on average nightly rate, the occupancy rate about 52% per year, is roughly about a million dollars per

year in just gross revenue. And then the TOT collected from that could range from 75,000 to 109,000 based on occupancy and of course events in the surrounding area. Okay. That Okay, so that's what I missed. I missed that part that that was their estimation of what we'd be getting in. Okay.

75 to 109. 75 to 109. Okay, thank you. And I want to be clear on that that's just the TOT, that doesn't include any registration fees or penalties that we would collect if we incorporated a short-term rental program. I think at one time when we were discussing we were concerned about that break-even point, you know, and is it worth, you know, trying, are we going to go negative, you know, we're going to bring that kind of stuff, but you know, anything that significantly brings up revenue as an alternate, you know, type of revenue source, I think is worth looking at. And you know, as a trial, these are what how many year agreements with something like this for an outsourced So these would just be one so we'd be able to evaluate the program. So first of course we would come back with establishing a short-term rental program and then we would go through the proper procurement procedures to make sure we find the right consultant at the affordable price and then of course that would be then brought back to council as well for approval. All right. Appreciate it. Councilmember Laura? Thank you, Mayor. Um Well, so when we had this discussion last, I know that the the county had used outside consultants to monitor their program. Um I would like option two. Um I what I don't like about option one is at this point we obviously as Councilmember Martinez mentioned, we don't know what the the scope or the the world is of that uh uh the rentals. So I think giving us a one-year option to figure out what we have, what's out there. Um Did they say when you spoke with the the individual that you spoke with? Did they say that they keep a portion or a percentage of the fees collected or is it just we would pay them 16,000 and they would remit everything collected to the city? It would just be what is paid for in the agreement. So if we decide to go with the TOT module, the total cost is 16,000 and then if we remove the TOT and just had enforcement and regulation of the

program and decided to collect TOT later, it would actually reduce the cost to 11,000 for the first year. And I'm glad that you mentioned that because I was thinking maybe for the first year since we really don't know what that scope is going to be is we don't worry about the TOT but we we focus on the enforcement and the registration of so that we can see what that world is and maybe if it if we see after the one year um It's like a trial period what that world looks like, maybe we go after the TOT at that point. But we could write the ordinance to include the TOT, right? And the consultant also has experience and expertise in this field, so they could always assist us too with drafting the ordinance. And then of course it would be reviewed by legal. So we could do like a phased approach is what I would think we can do, but that's just my thought. Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, absolutely. Council member Finn? Uh thanks, Mayor. Uh so Darren, question for you. So I'm going to go to option three real quick with with a question. So if we did an option three and in the example here is with Airbnb, are there any other companies that do do that type of service like Verbo or any of the others that are would and and if we did that option three, would we have to have an agreement with each one to manage their own type? We would have to. So far only Airbnb has approached us. They approached um HostGromo with the agreement. And so what they're doing is collecting the TOT on our behalf, but in terms of data collection, they're the ones that are responsible for it. And per the terms of the agreement, we don't have access to that data, as well as enforcement in terms of late penalties and fees. The only thing that they're doing is collecting the TOT on our behalf. We would still have to establish a program, as well as registration fees for each of the owners of short-term rentals. Okay, thank you. So then going to two, would this contract if we hired to do so, would they work with with more than

just Airbnb with it, you know, and they'd research out everyone that's out there, correct?

correct. And if some new company starts to develop and come out and one property owner drops Airbnb and they pick up another firm, cuz I understand that it sometimes that they might use more than one, right? That is correct. You may have a platform that's listed on multiple or a short-term rental on multiple platforms, sometimes under different names. They could be under LLCs. And so sometimes it's very difficult to find a single location on different platforms. And what this company specializes in is exploring all of the platforms that are on there and making sure that there's not listings kind of going through the cracks. Okay. And then something to share with council, it's been my experience when a buyer is purchasing a brand new home, a builder will allow a contingency sale in some aspects, but they want that home closed sometimes well beyond the the date of the new home being completed. And so that buyer has a whole family and things and so forth to try to accommodate and with our neighbors building more homes in the future, I think we will see an increase in these short-term rentals because then if if Banning's building your rancher's anchor going in all that and there's several thousand homes going in, it may bring in some more people into our area that need that short-term rental. And yeah, 6 months or less or so, so they can have a place to live while their new home's being finished. So I think that demand's only going to increase. And so I do like what um council member Lara had proposed, you know, if we did a phase thing, I think that's nice and helps, you know, and it's not too enforceable in the beginning, but it helps put together a good program that we can understand, have that contractor help put staff, you know, effort together so we can staff can better understand it in management manage the process, but I think that's a a very fair fee for what what would be offered. So I'd like option two. Thank you, Council member Griffin. Mayor Pro Tem White? Uh yeah, did you [clears throat] say that Airbnb is already collecting TOT?

They're not collecting it for us. They're the only ones who have approached us with agreement where they would collect it on our behalf. Okay. And do we know how how many of those 52 would be Airbnb versus non-Airbnb? When I last explored, it was in the mid-40s. So there was about 10 to 15 that were on the other side such as Verbo, but I can have I can work with the consultant that I was working with called Granicus, who offers the software if we were to do it in-house, and it can provide me an update and and they have a breakdown of how many rentals are on each platform. So, yeah, I'm just trying to get see if we can get an idea of the kind of numbers we're talking about so that option one, two, and three will make sense to us if you know, if one's going to generate a lot more if option one's going to generate twice as much money as option two, then we'd probably want to go with option one even though it's a higher cost to begin with. So, that's why I was asking whether or not we have any idea of what kind of numbers we're talking about other than the estimates that you put together. But, you know, if if option one gets you from your estimates were 75 to to 95, I think.

195 Um so, if option 31 if option one gets us all the way up there and option two only gets us the low end, to me now the the option the the best option would be option one. So, those are the kinds of things I'm looking at to try and make uh informative decision on that. That's all I have. Thanks, Mayor. Sure. Yeah, and I I think as I was reading through this, I definitely appreciated the options um you know, for me looking at it contracted out seems to be the most reasonable. I do like the build-up approach or the kind of the phased-in approach. It gives those houses that are currently there the you know, not just the slam of hey, you owe TOT in the next, you know, 30 days. It definitely give they can decide, you know, if this is something they want to continue doing if it's lucrative enough for them. Um and so, I do like that option. It also gives us the ability to to dive in a little bit further. Um I definitely would support number two with a year phase-in for the TOT collection um and look at that. Um, so with the the kind of discussion that's up here so far, um, you know, and and um, leaning into what Mayor Pro Tem White is asking for as well, it seems like if you could bring us back something with the option to contract and maybe dive into a little bit more of the specifics on the platform with a draft ordinance, does that seem reasonable to the council? You know, Mayor, my thought is that if the other if the rest of you are comfortable with the option two, I'm I'm okay with moving forward at this point with option two. Okay. Are you guys okay with that?

Mayor, may I ask uh, Council Member Laura, with your suggestion, were you thinking a 6-month time frame or a year? Or any any thought on that? Uh, I I think a year would be best for us to get a full scope of what's out there and and what uh, we'll we'll be looking at. So, the other question I have is do we want to start collecting the TOT or do we want to wait and do that or look at that after the first year? My thoughts were to look at that after the first year. I agree. Okay. Are you guys okay with that? Do you have clear direction? Sounds like bring an ordinance back with a contract. Um, And

So, so I'm a little confused now. We're not going to collect TOT during the first phase? Correct. That's on the direction of council. So, the proposal that was placed in the staff report has TOT as a module, but we can easily remove that module and it will be actually a cheaper cost for year one. But wouldn't we get a better understanding of the success if we were actually collecting the TOT for that one year as opposed to still not really having any idea of where we are financially after one year? So, the development of a short-term rental program in the city of Belmont, the purpose of bringing this was to discover possible sources of revenue. If we're not collecting TOT, I guess the break-even point would be just the registration cost of a short-term rental. So, it could break even and then be no cost to the city overall for the first year, but if revenue is the point of this program, then it would make sense to have a TOT collected in year one.

So, I'm not sure I understand how if we're paying someone 16,000 to put the program in place, how there's a break-even point if we're not raising any money. Because we would still when the creation of this program, we would have to establish a registration fee. And that registration fee once that would be brought to council, we could establish it to where based on the number of short-term rentals, which is about 50, could be a break-even where it covers the cost of that consultant. And the break-even cost, sorry to interrupt you, the break-even cost is a roughly about $200 as a registration fee. What is the downside with starting to collect TOT in the first year? Well, for me the the downside is we're paying more money up front, the 16,000, where I think if we just do the registration to to understand what that scope or the the number of uh short-term rentals that we have, um because I think it's Is it 5,000? It's 11,000. 11,000 to do the registration. And then I think can't we let's just say for the sake of argument, we register 100 units. We could calculate what the potential TOT would be moving forward off those 100 units, correct? We could cuz the consultant would manage the occupancy rates, what they're charging on the short-term rental platforms, and then we'd be able to work with finance to calculate how much TOT could be potentially calcul- or collected that first year. And the other thought was to ease in the current short-term rental folks into the new program rather than hitting them with everything up front, but I mean, if if we can get support to do the the TOT, I'll support the TOT. I just thought this would be a more of a phased approach. So, the 16,000 covers you now we're talking 11,000 for not collecting the TOT? That is correct.

enforcement. The 16,000 is to to include collecting the TOT? That is correct. So, it's an additional $5,000? Um To me, it's worth more to collect. I I think so. Okay.

Yeah, I I I think I think the additional $5,000 means we should we should start collecting TOT. Well, maybe maybe we can negotiate that to the 6-month. I think my concern, I think, is those that are currently operating, um you know, are going to have to change their fee schedule, see if this is worth it for them as well. So, I'm trying to think about it from um the homeowners' perspective. Um you know, and and I I'm okay with giving them a 6-month time frame and saying, "Hey, in 6 months we'll start collecting that." And then that may realize that a little sooner. Um and and at least to give them It's going to take us a little time to do this anyway, as well as to get them to register, cuz that's the other thing that's we're you know, this is like chasing business licenses and things along those lines as well. So, I I think this is going to take um some time, but from my perspective, I think giving them that time frame of saying, "Hey, in 6 months we'll start collecting." Um from the implementation date.

Do we have any idea about what a registration fee would be? Because the scenario that the mayor's pointing out in that direction, they would actually have to raise their fees twice. They'd have to raise it once to to add the the registration fee, and then later when we start charging a TOT, they'd have to raise their prices again. So, do we have I mean, is a registration fee under 100 bucks or over 5,000 or, you know, do you have any idea what uh registration fee would be? I think the recommendation I heard previously was around 200. Yeah, so

even. Yeah, it's about $200. One time or annually? That's annually. Okay. Yeah, so it would be the similar like a business license. So what we do is hopefully with the fee schedule in the future it would be incorporated into that. So if there was needed CPI adjustments to that that could also be adjusted with the fee schedule. But it ranges to about $200 and at that rate it would break even and cover the cost of the consultant completely and then moving forward it would just be revenue moving after that. So at a $200-ish registration fee um is it likely that we're going to find in 6 months to a year that we don't want to do any TOT collections at all? I don't think so either.

I think we I think we are going to want to collect. So I again I just don't understand spending 16,000 or 11,000 whatever it is and not pulling TOT um if if we can do it. I I don't think that Well, for me the discussion is not I I was trying to give the lead in for the the business owner essentially. I think that was the only thing I was trying to do with that 6-month time frame from the implementation date so that we could chase registrations and then also get a and just to to give a little bit of time almost like we do with fee increases you know where we kind of increase over time. So that was just my suggestion there. And just to be clear the $200 registration fee is only that's your break even point with your 11,000 which is your non-TOT model that we're talking about. It'd be higher.

And and I'm suggesting the additional 5,000 can if we're collecting TOT we may pay for the whole 16,000. Yeah. But you know these property owners or homeowners have have benefited from having no TOT and competing with our hotels for TOT. You know, so again, I just I don't understand why we wouldn't pilot the whole thing at once. But Any further discussion? No, I I do, Mayor. Um so, Dan, in in the data collecting, has there any bit has there been any information passed on on how far out reservations tend to go? For example, if we were to we were to make a rule that say, "Hey, in 6 months, we're going to start collecting a TOT." Are there res- or is it common that there are reservations for short-term rentals more than 6 months out from now? When working with Granicus, who's the one who provided the initial data that we presented a couple council meetings ago as well as this one, the reservation that they had were up to a month in advance. And that's the data that they could provide me without charging me. So, if I wanted to pay for additional data collection, they could provide me more, but it was up to a month that they would provide provide me free of charge of reservations. Okay. I still like what Mayor said about giving the current property owners some time because should they decide to, you know, dispose of the property, use it for something else, our our average days on market now is pushing 90, and then you got 30 days to sell. It could take them 4 months to get out from underneath the home. And so, I think at least a 6-month window to to notify them of of a you know, the TOT tax, I think would be would be fair on our part. Can I confirm from I confirm with council that we can structure the um policy to bring back that says effective 6 months from whenever Yeah, I I I have one last comment. What's the biggest event as far as it's

going to generate the most TOT in the city of Beaumont in the next 2 years? The Olympics. And so, if we're waiting if we're taking a year to get to get up to speed, and then the Olympics come in. Again, we're missing I think we're missing in that an opportunity to be ready to capitalize on that. And you know, I I just think waiting 6 months puts us in a position that it makes it harder to have this fully enforced and ready to go in 2028. I have a question. When do you choose Yeah, please go ahead.

my question is, so first you have to have the the ordinance, correct? So, that draft ordinance would come back and we discuss that, and then the proper noticing of an ordinance takes how long? Uh Introduction and you have the second reading. Okay. And that can happen at it becomes effective after adoption. After adoption, the ordinance comes. So So, about a month or so.

us into January cuz the earliest it can come back is June 2nd. So, once the ordinance is effective, then we can you said put in wording to to delay the effectiveness to whatever we decide to put in there, and then it kicks in, correct? So, you know, a part of the messaging to the public that this is going in this direction, I think is a part of the warning that to the property owners that it's coming. All right, you know, that that to me is giving notice cuz we are definitely we haven't said we're not going in that direction. So, by giving property owners even now that we're going into that direction to me is a part of their notice. So, by doing that, I wouldn't have a problem giving a 90-day effectiveness after the ordinance because to me they're already getting that that notice now. I agree with Mayor Pro Tem, I think waiting [snorts] to me is doesn't make sense. Uh and if it's just the notice that you're doing, then we can get that started kind of informally, but realistically after that effective date going into a 90-day, I think 6 months to 90-day, I mean, we can just, you know, as you said 4 months. So, I just kind of I kind of wrote the between the 90 and the 60. Um but, I definitely wouldn't wait a year. I wouldn't support that. I think it doesn't make sense in order to collect, but also to get the data that's coming in. Um because I don't think with just the 52 out there that that wouldn't be sufficient notice. And for anyone else that's thinking about going or that's under the radar that's not in that 52, you know, it's still a part of their notice that it's coming. Um so, I don't know how much more you need because I don't see the significance of waiting that long. So, my I support the two. I didn't ever say that. But, um I just don't think that a year is makes sense. 6 months even stretching it. I

would support more of a 90-day if anything after the ordinance. Okay, here it's coming. But, you know, That's that's my Yeah, I think you though for me I think you bring up a, you know, a valid point. I think um you know, some of the concern Council Member Finn brought up for me is, you know, how far out are these reservations? I know sometimes people do have reservations that are already out. Are they going to have to change their fees at that time? But, um you know, I I hear the logic behind that. I just want to give the homeowners some type of warning ahead of time so that they can prep for that. I just feel if, you know, something like this, a change like this, we should have a lead in period. Whether that's 90 days or 6 months, I agree with you a year is too long. Um you know, listening up here to you guys, I I definitely agree with you that a year is probably too long. Um so, I think we can all agree on that. What is the TOT percentage? 10%. What's that? [clears throat] 10%.

10%.

Okay. Yeah. So, we're, you know, in essence reducing somebody's profit by 10% at this point. So, I I would just want to be conscious of that. Or we're increasing the cost to rent it by 10%. It's possible. Potentially. It's possible. And Mayor, perhaps then I mean it's going to take a little bit to get it noticed and so forth that maybe we make it effective January 1. That's what I was thinking that while he was speaking also um and then it gives us a clear-cut date at least and we can um you know I like s- first of the year implementations in my mind. That works for the way that my mind works, but I don't know what the rest of the council's appetite is for that or not. I mean I realistically this comes back for an August approval I would think by the time it's truly said and done. You know, and so then you could end up with that would get them through the holidays and end up with a January 1. So the date though can be established when the short-term ordinance comes back. So Yeah, we can discuss it then. Sure. Absolutely. And go forward so. Okay, so it sounds like moving forward with option two. Um and uh the ordinance creation and then we can discuss further at that time um if it's effective immediately or if there's a date in which it moves into effect. Anything else from council? Okay. Great. Thank you Darren for bringing that back. Yes. You want to stay there cuz you're coming up next for legislation updates or no? I have Miss Noll here with me.

right. That's right. Okay, legislative updates May 2026 um by Britney. Excellent. [laughter]

Good evening Mayor and Council. Um This item provides a brief update on the federal and state legislative activity. So at this point in the year bills are moving through policy committees. So tonight's update highlights the items most relevant to the city's operations, infrastructure, and funding. Uh a few state highlights to um go over from the staff report. SB 1402 relates to property tax assessment appeals um and would expand appeal standards from owner-occupied single-family homes to a broader category of residential property. So, this could indirectly affect the city's property tax base and revenue in the future. AB 2190 relates to website accessibility and may affect how accessibility responsibilities are handled for city-managed webpages and vendor-supported online services. So, we'll be keeping our eye on that as well. AB 2459 relates to vehicle charging stations and would tie certain occupancy approvals to completion of electrical service connections for EV charging stations. For the city, this could affect permit review, inspection, and certificate of occupancy processes for applicable developments. At the federal level, the items staff are monitoring are primarily tied to infrastructure funding, our favorite topic here, and municipal finance. So, we're closely monitoring the transportation, housing, and urban development appropriations, which remain relevant to Beaumont's federal funding strategy. The city submitted community project funding requests earlier this year through this appropriations process for projects such as the Pennsylvania Grade Separation. This was also uh one of the priorities that was discussed on the recent uh DC trip that mayor and mayor pro tem attended um

for those advocacy meetings in Washington, D.C. So, staff will continue to monitor the process as it moves through the committees for review. We are also monitoring the surface transportation reauthorization, which will help shape the future of highway, freight, rail, formula, and discretionary transportation funding. In addition, S 3941 and HR 7769 are being monitored as municipal finance watch items, which could expand financing flexibility for local infrastructure and community development projects. More broadly, staff will continue tracking federal budget and funding activity for potential impacts to grant availability, infrastructure funding timelines, and intergovernmental coordination. Staff will return to council if policy direction, advocacy, or implementation action is needed. Tonight's recommended action is simply to receive and file the legislative update. I'm available if you have any questions. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Um I did want to uh see if there were any Why don't Do we need public comment on this item? I can check and see. I have no written comments. Zuly, do we have any callers on the line? No callers. Very excellent. I just wanted to comment I do like the way in which it's laid out this time highlighting our local ones um and I really appreciated the attention to detail there. So, thank you guys for that. Any other comments from council? All right. Thank you for those updates. All right. That moves us on to economic development. Thank you, Mayor. Just a real quick update. Um we did not have an April EDC meeting. Uh but we will have one next uh next Wednesday for May, which [clears throat] will largely consist of

updates on the various programs and projects we have going along. Wanted to highlight a little bit and you've touched on already a bit the DC trip that was made by staff and the mayor mayor pro tem a couple weeks ago. Follow up from that is tomorrow I will have a uh virtual meeting with the EDA office to get some more information for them and see if we can tailor some of what we're trying to do downtown to fit some of their programs as well. So um David Turchin Associates set that meeting up and that will be tomorrow. And then we're also in ICSC planning season which we will be out in a couple of weeks. And um I think we shared with you that last year we had 11 meetings which was sort of a record. Um we have eight or nine already scheduled at this point plus a couple of evening sort of social type things. So we're going to have a very similar day day and a half of a marathon of activity which is good. So um we will be working with you to build that schedule out and do some planning in advance and that's all I have for you. All right, great. Thank you. Any questions? All right, we are good. Thank you. Looks like no planning commission updates.

Mr. Jones does have a brief update for you. All right. Hey Don, I apologize it didn't make it in the script.

I apologize. Thank you, your honor. Mayor Pro Tem, city council members, the April 22nd, 2026 planning commission meeting was a digital billboard survey results presentation and workshop to review community input and explore regulatory options for digital billboard advertising in the city of Beaumont. The workshop component expanded on the survey input that you previously received from the public information officer uh favoring regulation by examining current and emerging digital board digital billboard technologies. Public testimony was received and the Lamar company offered to present council those cutting-edge trends for adaptation of digital billboards. The commission engaged in a focused discussion on potential policy approaches and alternatives to the city. Uh based on that discussion staff will return to the city council with a formal request and an action item for your consideration of a resolution recommending that the council provide further direction to staff to draft an ordinance to regulate digital billboards. And that's the presentation. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Um how is the attendance for planning commission? Are we getting 100% attendance most of the time? We are. Uh this previous not to throw him under the bus, but he was on vacation. I just one uh commissioner had to be out uh out of town, but it's good attendance every month.

All right, thank you. All right, excellent. Um I don't believe anything from city treasurer, city clerk's office? No report this evening. All right, city attorney? No report. City manager, deputy city manager? No, I kind of wanted to echo what you and Mayor Pro Tem mentioned about Market Night. I too was in attendance. I think between Don, Don, Kevin, Robert, Sue, and Martin and all their teams, it was a fantastic event. Even they said that it's getting easier. I There was like pros riding a bike for the first one back out there. I thought they staffed did a great job. I know they were out there really late, but I just wanted them to know we appreciate it, and I know the community really enjoys the event. Thank you. Yes, absolutely. All righty, future agenda items. Councilmember Finn? Yes, Mayor. Thank you. So, I have a request to address our alternates for our committees. Um our finance and audit committee we had to cancel the meeting for lack of a quorum. We had two excused absences, and so what I'd like to propose to the council that we can bring back and discuss is have our alternates be able to come and attend those meetings and be a voting member of that committee. And so if we know in advance with an excused absence, then it would would put it on Nicole's desk for them for her to reach out to to to have that alternate come. And I understand that sometimes it's an unforeseen absence where you find out just a few minutes before that they can't make it. But if it was a planned excuse, why not get that alternate more involved and give them the authority to come, sit on the dais, and make decisions, you know, and so forth over those recommendations that that come to council. And I And I know that could affect the finance and audit. I think it would affect economic development as well, parks and rec. And so I think it would it would help

and encourage those when we have multiple applicants that, "Hey, an alternate's not a bad spot." And so if we could bring that back, I'd appreciate that. All right. And then I also have one to bring back. Um I was approached about Allegheny and the cross some crossings there for the students. So if we could maybe bring something back from the public works side that looks at that area and see if some type of crossing, sidewalks, something is able to be done there. And then also Allegheny in in widening that street. I know that the fire department has difficulty um driving down that street with it lined with cars. So if we could bring that back, please. I would appreciate that. Any other future agenda items? Okay. Then that will take us to council reports. Council member Lara. Yes. Uh just wanted to comment on the work that was done for the Petraro ribbon cutting. It was an excellent event. Uh quite the soirée. Um and also just want to give a special thanks to our parks maintenance teams that uh uh we were playing soccer. Uh the parks have been in great condition for the practices and Sports Park has been in great condition for the game. So, I just wanted to make sure that I shared the thanks uh for the your team Doug doing the the work that they do. Thank you. That's all I have. Councilmember Fenn? Uh no reports tonight. Uh Councilmember Martinez? Thank you, Mayor. Just real quickly, uh attended the Potrero ceremony as well. Good job, Mayor, for your little speech and Mayor Pro Tem for ad-libbing and

[laughter]

It was really good, actually. Uh of course, we all attended the budget workshop. I attended LEAC. Congratulations again to all of our honorees. And uh RCA was I didn't go to RCA today or yesterday cuz I had jury duty. So, that um nothing to report. That's all. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem? Uh okay. So, we have the 2 by 2 uh recycled water meeting back in um the 13th. And uh discussion led to hopefully a little more cooperation on the the pricing that we need to move forward on that. Um DC was really good. Thank you for uh putting that all together. And uh it kept us busy. Um my only disappointment was I I couldn't get an angle on the um big beautiful ballroom. Couldn't get a picture of it. So, uh I didn't get a picture of the rebel, which I was hoping for, but uh And I got more here. Just a personal thank you for uh the Mayor for your help on the flight home from Chicago. Um We had a

about that. [laughter]

We had a 2 by 2 with Calimesa. We met with them regarding um their issue that they wanted to talk about I brought up earlier is whether or not the city of Beaumont would support um providing mutual aid to Calimesa. And uh we told them that it was something [snorts] that we wanted to to look into and discuss a little bit further. That was why I had the questions tonight. Um Per trial ribbon cutting, that was something else. And LEAC was all always one of my favorite events to go to. Julio and Julio and I got our own table. So, we had two or three two servings of dinner and two servings of dessert.

[laughter] So. Um and I think that's all I have. Already, great.

All right. And as for me, I too attended the water two-by-two-by-two. Um I also attended the ribbon cutting for um Sorenson Park on May 14th. For those of you that not have not been to that park, it is absolutely gorgeous. Pickleball courts, basketball courts, huge open field. Um truly a very beautiful park uh situated in a very nice part of town as well. So, it was absolutely a great job uh done by the parks department. So, uh well done. Uh we did go to DC. I mentioned some of those meetings. It was a very productive during that time frame. Um and I appreciate all of the staff that went there and helped uh coordinate and wrangle us. Uh a shout out as Council Member Lara said as well, we had the Cherry Cup in town at the end of April. Um I have attended about six tournaments since January and ours absolutely had the best looking fields. So, um big shout out to the team. They've really done a great job there. Um and also a big shout out to AYSO. They coordinated um with shorter, you know, not having two fields at the very end. They added Friday night games and they really worked to coordinate it and it was a very well-run event. Um uh the Potrero groundbreaking, thank you to the PIO and RCTC for their work on that project. I'm excited to see some dirt start moving over there. Uh and then I mentioned the meeting with the governor's office yesterday, and as highlighted above, Beaumont Knights absolutely was incredible this time around, and hopefully we can continue um with that momentum. And we'll end on that for this evening. Our next meeting will be Tuesday, June 2nd. Uh we will not be having a second meeting in the month of May, uh as we will be at ICSC and uh some other events. So, I will adjourn this meeting at 8:32.

Mhm.